Chronic Car Buyers Anonymous (Archived)

tbirdmarco

 That’s good mileage for a BSUVE like that New York car gone very good 

tbirdmarco

 When it comes to kids watching bed stuff up to the parents to do what he thinks best to each his own my parents really weren’t strict at all what we watched all depends many other factors to do each his own have a good day all I don’t have any kids so probably shouldn’t comment Ha ha ha 

roadburner

I still hand calculate. The Mini(and every previous BMW) has had an optimistic OBC by about 4%. In contrast, the 2 Series OBC is 4% pessimistic.
You can go into the service menu and adjust the calculations but I've never bothered with it.

kyfdx

I do a quick calculation in my head, every time I fill up my car. I never reset the trip computer, so it's lifetime, or since the last time the battery was disconnected.

I do it, in case I've missed some major change in efficiency, that might point to a problem.

I had a CJ-5 with no gas gauge. Got 15.5 mpg, just like clockwork, so I watched the odometer, when I filled up. Found out I had a carburetor problem, when I ran out of gas, two tanks in a row..

suydam

With GM, I have the quick readout, and on the app current and lifetime stats. I also get monthly diagnostics emailed and sent to my app. So no need for manual calculations.

kyfdx

suydam said:

With GM, I have the quick readout, and on the app current and lifetime stats. I also get monthly diagnostics emailed and sent to my app. So no need for manual calculations.

The information sent to your app is the same info that would be on the car computer readout, so it's subject to the same error possibility. Unless I forget long division, manual calculations are exact, when averaged over time.

stickguy

I let the TC monitor efficiency. Works fine as long as consistently off!

kyfdx

suydam said:

With GM, I have the quick readout, and on the app current and lifetime stats. I also get monthly diagnostics emailed and sent to my app. So no need for manual calculations.

I wish I had an app, though...

andres3

xwesx said:

andres3 said:

Ha! I already realized everyone smokes cigarettes in just about every movie ever made, but having a kid who's now 4 has really made me realize how violent and profane our movies are! Never bothered me before, but dang, not a lot of PG content out there that isn't animated.

So how old should someone be for R-rated violence? R-rated sex?

Really depends on the parent and, I suppose, the children.

For me, I want my children to leave the cares of adulthood/adolescence for those periods of their lives. As a result, my children, who are ten and thirteen, still enjoy "kids shows" that most their age would eschew. Probably the most violent content they have watched is Star Wars, and my wife still won't let them see the Ep 1-3 trilogy yet. Probably the crudest content they've watched is "Diary of a Wimpy Kid."

Another common one, Harry Potter, they have only seen the first two movies and read through book five. Again, for my wife, there is just too much violence in them. So, she's set them on a slow pace so that they're more mature when they get to the more violent content (which, honestly, starts in earnest at about Goblet of Fire). No superhero movies, which are so popular today, etc.

To the contrary, my brother watched pretty much anything (Transformers comes to mind) with his kids, even when they were quite young. My nephew is the same age as my son, and he watched the first Transformers when it was relatively new. I don't recall how many years now, but he must have been only five or six.

As to whether it really matters? I don't know; time will tell for those two.... we have our own little social experiment in the making!

I do know that a lot of the crap I saw at way too young an age probably left more of an impression on me than I would care to admit....

Hmmm, that last line is starting to look like the start of a criminal confession.

I've always held the position that violent movies and video games never made me kill anyone.

ab348

kyfdx said:

suydam said:

With GM, I have the quick readout, and on the app current and lifetime stats. I also get monthly diagnostics emailed and sent to my app. So no need for manual calculations.

The information sent to your app is the same info that would be on the car computer readout, so it's subject to the same error possibility. Unless I forget long division, manual calculations are exact, when averaged over time.

I don't understand. The data is mileage and fuel consumed. The former is presumably accurate (and there is no alternative source anyway) while I have no idea how the vehicle calculates the latter. But you would have manual error as well since you cannot be certain that you are filling the tank to the same level every time (in which case you would be really anal and beyond help ). What am I missing?

stickguy

That they are anal and beyond help.

kyfdx

Just in this recent discussion, we’ve seen reports of the trip computer being “optimistic”, compared to actual calculations. Over multiple tanks, a manual calculation cannot be wrong, unless you are spilling fuel.

Since we don’t know how the trip computer measures fuel use, I could surmise any number of scenarios of how it could be inaccurate.

ab348

kyfdx said:

Just in this recent discussion, we’ve seen reports of the trip computer being “optimistic”, compared to actual calculations. Over multiple tanks, a manual calculation cannot be wrong, unless you are spilling fuel.

But we are talking a BMW product in those cases.

I still don't get it. Let's leave the mileage figure out of the discussion for the moment since it is all you have to go on. The other variable is fuel consumed. How are you determining that is accurate? Can't rely on a gas station pump shutoff. Are you filling to the edge of the filler neck? That is supposed to be bad too as it saturates the canister that collects fumes.

If you are worried about running out of fuel, perhaps the strategy of not running the tank close to empty should be employed. If you are concerned about determining the exact fuel mileage, maybe one of these is an appropriate accessory

kyfdx

Calculating fuel mileage is pretty simple. Averaging over several tanks, reduces the chances of varying fill levels. It has nothing to do with BMW. It's just math.

And, actually, the first two recent reports of inaccurate trip computers were a Honda and an Acura. (just look back one page)

gotgt3

stickguy said:

I'm also the designated car man in the office (and neighborhood). Many people know to talk to me before they do something, or I get mad at them. I have actually gone with a few people to negotiate the deal, or at least help out (somewhere between a third base coach and voice of reason).

And man, do I love those test drive coupons. Get some pretty good stuff that way.

lol I need someone like you in my life. I tend to double check everything but I'm still always suspicious I got played. Presently shopping and there was a discrepancy of approx 5k from the one dealer - heck same day online check was a 2k diff sans trade - and the guy had the nerve to tell me he's doing me a favour, my trade has no equity, and I "want too much car". Girl, bye.

roadburner

kyfdx said:

Calculating fuel mileage is pretty simple. Averaging over several tanks, reduces the chances of varying fill levels. It has nothing to do with BMW. It's just math.

And, actually, the first two recent reports of inaccurate trip computers were a Honda and an Acura. (just look back one page)

Also, I compare the calculated mpg to the OBC mpg and the percentage difference rarely varies by more than one percent.

cdnpinhead

ab348 said:

I don't understand. The data is mileage and fuel consumed. The former is presumably accurate (and there is no alternative source anyway) while I have no idea how the vehicle calculates the latter. But you would have manual error as well since you cannot be certain that you are filling the tank to the same level every time (in which case you would be really anal and beyond help ). What am I missing?

In general, the difference between when the pump cuts off and when you hang it back up is a few cents. What I've seen over the past ten years on the two cars (one for only a year) that have MPG calculations is that they're about 6% optimistic. I have data (see my handle), but no one really cares. If I saw the car showing about half of the calculated values above the real number and half below I'd be fine. This is not the case. For normal people who could give a rip less about this, subtract about 10% off what you car is telling you're getting.

The marketing people shot the engineers when these displays were defined. Both our cars are dead on for every other parameter -- odometer, speedometer, outside temp, you name it. They're perfectly capable of displaying accurate data, but don't.

Go figure.

tbirdmarco

Wow. Cool on all above

fintail

Been thinking about what I might do if I don't buy out the current lease, and don't get a new lease.

Maybe something like this - diesel would be even better. Two things I want are: unusual (if not rare), and high depreciation floor if possible. A rig like this would have both.

au1994

So its been about 6 months since I acquired my X1 and I thought I would give everyone a report.

Overall I’m still very pleased with the purchase. I knew coming from a 335i that there would be a huge difference in power but the 2.0 turbo 4 does just fine in this application and it moves along nicely. I’m averaging about 29mpg through a lot of stop and go traffic to boot. Plus I’m not shy to put my foot into it when I can. Transmission works well with the engine too. Nice, crisp shifts and no hesitation or sense of hunting for a gear or downshift.

In the BMW forums, there is a lot of talk and dislike for the standard seats which I have. I don’t agree and do not have any complaints about them. To be fair, I have not done a road trip with it but the evening commute can stretch past an hour and I don’t have any comfort issues. Quality of the interior is excellent for the class. Fit is a little iffy as i’ve Started to hear a few rattles that I need to get checked out. Not unnerving yet but definitely want to stop them before they get to that point.

From the utility side, It’s doing everything I need. Over the holidays we did our annual purge and trip to the donation center and it handled everything with the backseat down, including a bed frame resting on the console.

I really like the huge sunroof and it almost makes up for not having a convertible.

Of course styling is subjective but I still find it a nice looking little CUV, especially when its cleaned up!

So no regrets other than the usual CCBA’er “wish I could have one of everything!”. I shopped the X1 against a Volvo S60, GTI and TLX among others. A bit all over the map and probably would have been happy with any of ‘em. I still find myself looking longingly at an S60. I just think they are darn good looking and I like the idea of being a little different from the crowd. We all know and love the GTI here so I don’t think I would have regretted that and the TLX just seems to do a whole lot well too.

My only complaints would be that there is a slight but noticeable delay in the back up cam popping up from the time you put it in reverse and the second is its a little noisy depending on the road surface. The latter may be the tires? It came the Pirelli Cinturo (sp?) P7’s as the OEM tire.

28firefighter

Great review - and I would have to agree with most of the things you said. I would also say that the Pirelli RF tires are probably the biggest weak spot of the X1 - at least in IMHO.

28firefighter

fintail said:

Been thinking about what I might do if I don't buy out the current lease, and don't get a new lease.

Maybe something like this - diesel would be even better. Two things I want are: unusual (if not rare), and high depreciation floor if possible. A rig like this would have both.

I like.

graphicguy

kyfdx said:

Calculating fuel mileage is pretty simple. Averaging over several tanks, reduces the chances of varying fill levels. It has nothing to do with BMW. It's just math.

And, actually, the first two recent reports of inaccurate trip computers were a Honda and an Acura. (just look back one page)

The onboard computer on my TLX is 5% more optimistic on the MPG. IT’s almost like it was programmed in that way. I’m tracked every fill up since I got it, and that 5% is consistent.

My BMWs were the most accurate. RB...that 1% is spot on. There were many fill ups where even that 1% accuracy rate was off....more like 0.5%.

Michaell

28firefighter said:

Great review - and I would have to agree with most of the things you said. I would also say that the Pirelli RF tires are probably the biggest weak spot of the X1 - at least in IMHO.

We put the Pirelli P7 RF's on the daughters Countryman. She hasn't had any issues or complaints, but I'm not sure she's attuned to the same things you guys are. So long as they hold air, she's good with it.

The MINI is a rough riding beast, to begin with. I don't think the tires will make that much of a difference.

28firefighter

What I don't know is if my complaint is with RF tires in general, or just the Pirellis. Regardless they seem pretty harsh on our Seattle roads and tend to follow every bump and divot in the road.

kyfdx

We had two sets of RFs on the 2011 X3. Those rode pretty well, but they were 17" wheels.

The new one has 19" wheels, and though they aren't low profile, like on a coupe, they do have 1" less sidewall than the 17" from the last X3. It's easily discernible from a ride quality perspective, but I'm not blaming it on them being RFs. It's the one option that came on the car that I didn't really want.

cdnpinhead

My Subaru is the standard 6-8% optimistic on displayed MPG vs. calculated. Not a Honda product in sight.

stickguy

I do like these cars, but posting because this might be the only person that buys a luxo hot rod full sized sedan, and drives less than JMonroe. 13,200 in 10 years? wow. Especially since not your usual grandma drives to church and bingo car.

http://www.royaleasing.com/detail-2007-infiniti-m45-4dr_sedan_sport-used-17301633.html

qbrozen

Oooo. I always liked the M

tbirdmarco

Love the m to  nice large.  Car

corvette

Damn, I actually would’ve considered that M45 instead of the Mustang. Cheaper and more refined but older. And more tolerable as a daily driver. 

It would be cool to own enough cars that you only put 1-2,000 miles a year on each one. 

qbrozen

BTW, even after adjusting for miles, that M is not worth more than $12k TOPS.

stickguy

I imagine that dealers try for a homerun on something with the super low miles, since it is a novelty. No clue what the average buyer thinks of it.

andres3

I didn't know Infiniti had a V8.

Michaell

andres3 said:

I didn't know Infiniti had a V8.

Since the beginning ....

breld

Forgot to mention, but my wife and I stopped by this small broker/dealership a couple nights ago, and I test drove this:

2014 435i drive manual

Price has been reduced quite a bit, so I think it's about right now. I liked it, but between testing out a couple M235i's last week, and having driven around in my Type R a lot this past week, I have to say I just didn't find this 435i to be all that compelling. It was definitely nice to have the manual, and of course there's no complaints with the power on tap. But the steering felt a little "loose" (for lack of better words), and the manual wasn't as crisp as I recalled from our E90 m-sports.

I did note to my wife that this was the first year of the current 4-series, so I believe that steering feel has been improved in subsequent years.

Anyway - beautiful car. The upgraded 19" wheels look nice (though I wouldn't necessarily seek them out as an option). This place also had a 335i xdrive with a manual, so my kind of broker!

corvette

qbrozen said:

BTW, even after adjusting for miles, that M is not worth more than $12k TOPS.

With that many miles, it's a unicorn, though. Someone, somewhere, will probably pay extra for it having almost no miles.

nyccarguy

andres3 said:

I didn't know Infiniti had a V8.

Sure.  You can still get one in the Q70 (Which used to be the M56)

tbirdmarco

 That will be the place then try to find your next ride and broiled since the home a lot of cars there with manual transmissions tell them what you’re looking for maybe they can find it for you 

tbirdmarco

Anyone doing any car looking this weekend? Before going to the Nissan dealer leader when I get out of work will update later

tbirdmarco

 Happy Friday all 

tbirdmarco

I am with you  vet.  On the  cars 

graphicguy

stickguy said:

I do like these cars, but posting because this might be the only person that buys a luxo hot rod full sized sedan, and drives less than JMonroe. 13,200 in 10 years? wow. Especially since not your usual grandma drives to church and bingo car.

http://www.royaleasing.com/detail-2007-infiniti-m45-4dr_sedan_sport-used-17301633.html

ONe of my former bosses had one....identical in color, V8, the works. Never drove it. But, rode in it quite a bit. At the time, I thought it was a really nice car. Comfy....all loaded up (minus all the safety tech in today’s cars), rode nice.

Not sure the market on these, but the price seems low given the Uber low miles on it.



Ooooops....just saw “Q’s”assessment. $12K? I think that would be a great car....reliable, nice inside and out....a lot of life left in it.

pensfan83

graphicguy said:

The onboard computer on my TLX is 5% more optimistic on the MPG. IT’s almost like it was programmed in that way. I’m tracked every fill up since I got it, and that 5% is consistent.

My BMWs were the most accurate. RB...that 1% is spot on. There were many fill ups where even that 1% accuracy rate was off....more like 0.5%.

I'm going to have to track mine. Call it laziness but I haven't bothered calculating gas mileage by hand on the Acura yet. I'll be curious to see if it aligns with yours.

carnaught

Had an M35, similar to that one, nice car, but hard ride with the Sport package, and terrible gas mileage. I can just imagine the M45’s gas mileage.

nyccarguy

carnaught said:

Had an M35, similar to that one, nice car, but hard ride with the Sport package, and terrible gas mileage. I can just imagine the M45’s gas mileage.

Miles Per Gallon aren't Infiniti's strong suit, Smiles Per Mile are

rny421

pensfan83 said:

graphicguy said:

The onboard computer on my TLX is 5% more optimistic on the MPG. IT’s almost like it was programmed in that way. I’m tracked every fill up since I got it, and that 5% is consistent.

My BMWs were the most accurate. RB...that 1% is spot on. There were many fill ups where even that 1% accuracy rate was off....more like 0.5%.

I'm going to have to track mine. Call it laziness but I haven't bothered calculating gas mileage by hand on the Acura yet. I'll be curious to see if it aligns with yours.

Mine was about 5% high on my first highway trip home, but on my first tank of gas around town, it was spot on. 25 mpg around town is great for me.

My TLX is actually in the shop right now. It has some cold weather transmission issues, the driver's heated seat doesn't work, and it's not picking up HD radio stations. I have a V6 TLX as a loaner. Believe it or not, I seem to prefer my 4-cylinder to the V6 so far...

roadburner

nyccarguy said:

Miles Per Gallon aren't Infiniti's strong suit, Smiles Per Mile are

I don't think I've ever made a purchase/selling/trading decision based on fuel economy.

stickguy

I drove a 4 cyl and 6 cyl TLX back to back. The 4 definitely feels lighter on its feet. But the V6 just pulls so nice.

Mr_Shiftright

roadburner said:

nyccarguy said:

Miles Per Gallon aren't Infiniti's strong suit, Smiles Per Mile are

I don't think I've ever made a purchase/selling/trading decision based on fuel economy.

Very often, the "savings" when someone buys Car A with 35 mpg over Car B with 31 mpg, doesn't justify what they gave up in Car B. If you went from your old car with 15 mpg to a new one with 38 mpg, that might pencil out a lot more rationally. But even in pricey California, the difference between those extremes of MPG is $1,500 a year.